| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="SecondPaper" |
|---|
It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted. |
|
<
< | Erica, I've started revising this paper (6.7.10). I will continue to do so tonight and tomorrow, so feel free to jump in if you have any more ideas or input |
| | A Solution That is too Easy?
-- By JacquelynHehir - 17 Apr 2010 |
| | While the approximately 650 educators are in these reassignment centers they continue to be paid their full salary, at a cost that is estimated to be over 30 million dollars a year. |
|
<
< | Purpose of this paper |
>
> | Purpose of this Paper |
| | |
|
<
< | This paper is not, however, meant to address the admittedly pressing problems of wasting taxpayers’ dollars and teachers’ talents. Instead, it will examine the proposed solution with respect to a smaller, but exceedingly important, issue associated with the rubber room; will it offer hope for those educators who are there unfairly? |
>
> | This paper is not, however, meant to address the admittedly pressing problem of wasting taxpayers’ dollars. Instead, it will examine the proposed solution with respect to a smaller, but important, issue associated with the rubber room; will it offer hope for those educators who are detained unfairly? |
| | |
|
<
< | It has long been NYC teacher folklore that the reason many educators spend so much time in the rubber room is because there is no real case against them. Now, of course, there are exceptions, and some of the people who are accused of misconduct are guilty and should absolutely be fired. However, it is very easy for a principal to convince a student or parent to make an exaggerated claim or two, and suddenly a teacher is facing serious allegations. |
>
> | It has long been NYC teacher folklore that the reason so many educators spend time in the rubber room is because there is no real case against them. Now, of course, there are exceptions, and some of the people who are accused of misconduct are guilty and should absolutely be fired. However, it is very easy for a principal to convince a student or parent to make an exaggerated claim or two, and suddenly a teacher is facing serious allegations. |
| | Likewise, as a former teacher I will confirm that, sometimes, trying to change the status quo or challenging school policy is more than enough to convince a principal that a few allegations are necessary to scare a teacher back into her place, if not get her sent away entirely. |
|
>
> | |
| | Will this new system address these significant due process concerns? |
|
>
> | |
| | The Solution
The proposed solution appears to involve three main components: 1) The Department of Education (DOE) is going to hire more arbitrators to hear the cases. 2) There will be a strict schedule requiring certain steps of the investigation process to take place in clearly defined lengths of time. 3) Most educators that have been accused of misconduct will perform clerical work in schools while they await their trial; those who have been accused of serious misconduct will be suspended entirely. |
| | The proposed solution appears to involve three main components: 1) The Department of Education (DOE) is going to hire more arbitrators to hear the cases. 2) There will be a strict schedule requiring certain steps of the investigation process to take place in clearly defined lengths of time. 3) Most educators that have been accused of misconduct will perform clerical work in schools while they await their trial; those who have been accused of serious misconduct will be suspended entirely. |
|
<
< | Robinson Again. |
| | |
|
<
< | At this point I am reminded again of Robinson’s quote, “A real lawyer knows how to take care of a legal problem.” This solution-centered approach is appealing; I like the idea of defining lawyers by their ability to do what it is they have been trained to do. |
>
> | Will it Work? |
| | |
|
<
< | The proposal to close the rubber rooms makes me imagine another statement Robinson might make, “A real solution is one that takes care of a problem.” The rubber room problem is a result of a system that, among other things, does not process claims quickly enough and is not being held accountable unreasonably long waiting periods. It seems that hiring more people and setting strict deadlines, while not the perfect solution, will get us a lot closer to solving the problem. |
>
> | This is not the first time that the Department of Education has tried to solve the rubber room problem. The last time the city and union tried to fix the situation, they reached an agreement to, well, hire more arbitrators. However, due to budget concerns, only three new positions were created, and it did little to alleviate the workload. So there is some historical evidence weighing against this solution. |
| | |
|
>
> | More importantly, the arbitrators are not the only people involved in making these decisions. The cases need to be investigated, and prepared as well. Simply hiring more people who are involved in one aspect of the process is too little too late. Especially if the investigation and hearing process itself is not changed.
Further, the New York City school system is an incredibly large system, with many administrative decisions being made on a school-by-school basis. Yet these schools are still, in theory, accountable to a centralized body. In practice, however, the DOE rarely has any idea about the politics or experiences within a particular school. In fact, the Department of Education has developed an elaborate system to indentify each school by a single letter grade, ensuring that anyone not creating the report can identify a school with the minimal amount of personal knowledge. |
| | |
|
<
< | Will it work? |
>
> | This proposed solution may result in the disconnected central body processing the cases more quickly. Yet the issue of system misuse, perpetuated by the administrators in the individual schools, will remain unseen and unaddressed. |
| | |
|
<
< | This is not the first time that the Department of Education has tried to solve the rubber room problem. The last time the city and union tried to fix the situation, they reached an agreement to, well, hire more arbitrators. However, due to budget concerns, only three new positions were created, and it did little to alleviate the workload. So there is some historical evidence weighing against this solution. |
>
> | Of course, this is not to imply that there are not cases where a teacher should be removed due to incompetence or misbehavior. However, a more effective solution to the issue of case overload would not only aim to hear cases more quickly, but to decrease the number of cases in the first place. If principals and other school administrators are held accountable for misuse of the hearing process, this would be a first step in lightening the overall load. |
| | |
|
<
< | More importantly, the arbitrators are not the only people involved in making these decisions. The cases need to be investigated, and prepared as well. Simply hiring more people who are involved in one aspect of the process may be too little too late. Especially if the investigation and hearing process itself is not changed. |
| | |
|
<
< | Also, although the timeline is a good idea, will it actually be followed? And if not, what are the mechanisms in place to enforce it? |
| | |
|
>
> | The Clerical Work Issue |
| | |
|
<
< | Teacher Worries |
>
> | Under the new system the teacher would not be sent to a special room to do nothing, but rather would be required to do clerical work. This is also problematic, since the wrongly accused teacher is not only unable to do the job she desires while the allegations are dealt with, she is also forced to do a job she does not want. Being forced to sit in idleness is bad enough, but to have your abilities co-opted to aid an educational system that is persecuting you unfairly is a particularly egregious fate for the wrongly accused teacher. |
| | |
|
<
< | Under the new system the teacher could not be sent to a special room to do nothing, but rather would be required to do clerical work. This in itself is somewhat problematic, since the wrongly accused teacher is not able to do the job she desires while the allegations are dealt with. Of course, if the cases are actually heard more quickly, and they are decided fairly, than that may be the tradeoff to be sure that there is a check in place against teachers who are actually wrongdoers. But it seems like a fairly band-aid approach to a problem that has roots that go much deeper. |
>
> | The clerical work aspect is not necessarily always a bad idea. Forcing a teacher who is rightly accused to do clerical work, on the other hand, is less troublesome, especially since the teacher can choose to leave the DOE if she would rather not participate in the assigned work until she is formally dismissed. However, it does emphasize the need to attack system abuse in addition to case overload. |
| | |
|
<
< | What now? |
>
> | Conclusion |
| | |
|
<
< | At this point only time will tell if this actually helps to solve the dual problems of removing teachers who are ineffective or dangerous to students from the classroom, while protecting educators targeted for whistle blowing or related issues. It is a neat looking solution, and Klein and Mulgrew gave it an appropriate amount of pomp and circumstance. So now it remains to be seen, can the most obvious solution actually solve a problem? Or will it just ignore the subtleties and cover a messy wound with a neater looking band-aid? |
>
> | A better solution would try to solve the dual problems of removing teachers who are ineffective or dangerous to students from the classroom, while protecting educators targeted for whistle blowing or related issues and increase the rate at which cases are decided. Simply hiring more arbitrators, who participate in the very end of the process, without holding school administrators accountable, is unlikely to accomplish both these goals. |
| |
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. |
| | # * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, JacquelynHehir
Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of that line. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated list |
|
<
< |
Jacquelyn, this is a really well-written paper on an interesting topic, one that I'm not very familiar with, so take the following suggestions with a grain of salt. I appreciated the tie-in you made to Robinson, which I think you could push further in your analysis of the deeper roots of this problem. I think one way to enhance this paper would be bringing the subject into a different context. For example, you could analyze the subject in the light of the larger context of school funding (and social services funding in general) in New York, particularly since there has been some talk of firing teachers en masse (See: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/nyregion/06budget.html?ref=nyregion). Or perhaps give a little more background on the history of education and hiring practices in New York? Ultimately, I think you need to answer this question: So what? What is the significance of this solution, and what alternatives should be explored?
I highlighted certain phrases that I thought were too colloquial. This is just a stylistic preference on my part, but I feel some of the language detracts from your argument. Good luck, and let me know if you need additional editing help! Will not be on campus but am available at seligea@gmail.com, and hope to have my rewrite of the paper up by the end of week. Mind recommending any sources?
Erica
Rewrite of Rubber Rooms
Described by its contingents as "Kafka-esque," prison-like, and just plain boring, NYC reassignment centers house public-school teachers with alleged contract violations, ranging from incompetency to assault. Some teachers are transferred to these centers without being informed of their alleged infractions. Legally, administrators may delay giving notice to teachers for up to six months, and in practice, some teachers can wait years before being officially charged.
Known as “rubber rooms,” these buildings provide a place for teachers to stay while their salaries continue to be paid, and also ensure that litigation against school districts is kept at a minimum. At the same time, rubber rooms are incredibly wasteful, both of taxpayers’ money and teachers’ lives, particularly those who have no valid case against them. For these reasons, the city’s teacher’s union and the mayor recently reached a compromise wherein rubber rooms will be shut down by December 2010.
The main problems rubber rooms presented to teachers were their punitive nature and the fact that teachers were often given inadequate process to be assigned to these rooms in the first place. For administrators, rubber rooms were costly and a poor means of firing incompetent teachers. Will the compromise of scrapping these rooms and allowing teachers to perform administrative work inside their buildings, while ensuring speedier process, solve these problems?
The rubber rooms themselves are just a powerful symbol of the inadequate process being provided to schoolteachers. One teacher, suspended for several months, complained that, "I have yet to be contacted by a lawyer. So I really don't know when that's going to be. So I'm just sitting here waiting." In the compromise, the city attempts to address this problem by hiring 16 more arbitrators to hopefully weed out the false allegations from the truthful ones.
The Trouble with Firing Teachers
Analysis of the Solution in Light of Budgetary Concerns
"To tell you the truth, it doesn't matter where we wait, it's the process of waiting." |